And one is being perpetrated by one player (foot fault) while the other is done by the officials or courts folks setting up the net. Two entirely different things.
And if Delpo thinks the net is high, he can get it measured and corrected. Just like if someone is foot-faulting obviously, their opponent can warn and then call it.
So your argument is still idiotic and doesn't even make the point you were trying to make.
You are taking the delpo/nadal too literally. I just used them as examples of different playing styles.
Ok, I'll be more straightforward. The beginning of this line of argument started with tom saying the big problem with a ff'er is that they gain an advantage in angle and space to hit into by being closer to the net. This is 100% true.
But, what if the net were lower than it should be? Wouldn't that give the same advantage? Seems to me it would. So I asked why he is so adamant about someone ff'ing by even a tiny bit, but doesn't care to see if there is an advantage gained because of a lower than legal net.
The argument the went to saying that this is Ok because it is the same for both. So from this I deduced that we aren't concerned with enforcement of the rules per se, but rather only concerned with enforcement to the point that the playing field is equal (I won't say fair).
So then I wondered, well, what if the lower net favored one player over another. Let's say one guy is a huge server, so playing with a net a few inches lower than regulation gives him a huge advantage compared to his opponent with a weaker serve that can't take advantage of this rule deviation.
The consensus seems to be that this is fine because they are hitting over the same net, so nobody is given an unfair advantage. Seems like an odd argument to me, but if it makes sense to you, OK.
I'm also perplexed with an inconsistent enforcement of tennis rules. Seems we want to enforce ff'ing to the letter of the law. If my shoelaces touch the line, that is a black and white violation and is a fault (which is 100% true). But we aren't going to worry about net height (also pretty black and white) because if it isn't right, that's fine. It's the same for both (never mind that both players are being allowed to foot fault in all of the previous examples in this thread, so in that respect, the playing field is also even).
And further, suggesting a parallel between stepping into the court (ff'ing) to gain an advantage with respect to angle and space to hit into and just having a lower net to gain the same advantage is "idiotic"?
Do I have it right?